jarabaa

Thank you so much for your response expanding on the earlier points you made. I totally agree with everything you say! I too love that sense of being provoked, stimulated, (in the case of music) taken out of myself to some other place - following engagement with a ... fine, rich work of artistic creation, whether book or film, play or painting, song or poem. It is one of the unique experiences of being human. And maybe it's immaterial or beside the point when I wonder whether creative artists (e.g. the writers here) seek to elicit those processes of provocation, stimulation, transport to some other plane of consciousness...

The important thing is: it happens. I think very often writers, poets, musicians are just driven by their creative forces - they create something because they ... must, they need to - and then the "something" is there, in existence, and the rest of us respond to it (or are moved by it whether or not we think we are "responding").

Now I'm drifting into a world of blather about aesthetics! But I appreciate the very fine writing in this series, and frankly, I love every Phupha/Tian encounter. Eyes, gesture, movement, voice, facial expression - in every way these two actors give us a male/male love story that is totally spellbinding. That's honestly how I feel. And if and when they kiss ... I'll faint. I kid you not. I'm that keyed up.

I agree. They're complex, multi-layered characaters. That comes across. The writing is good, yes ... but it may be going a bit far to suggest that the writers are so sophisticated as to have a nuanced strategy in mind aimed at prompting us to examine our motivations in life. Also, sometimes messages in real life are ... rather simple and straightforward.

Both Tian and Phupha are beautiful men who exemplify "care, respect, concern and consideration". So ... do all these admirable virtues mean that these two cannot ultimately fall in love, let alone kiss each other? Why? It's as though we're saying that any expression of physical love between two men belongs to the shallow world of the "cliché box of BL tropes" (see below) - whereas in high-class "realistic" writing that reflects in-depth character development, we don't need any crude kissing or "physical romance". Again, why?

Can't a well-told, complex story about engaging and profound male characters show them at some point acknowledging their love - and expressing it physically? We would never dream of applying this standard to heterosexual love stories. If a male-female love story features in a novel by an author who's received the Nobel Prize for Literature plus the praise of the most discerning critics, we wouldn't expect the love described to be abstinent and kiss-less, devoid of any physical expression. Nor would we dream of saying that the absence of physical love in a heterosexual story is evidence of realism. So why do we do this with regard to male/male love stories? In "reality", I have to tell you, love between men, even the most sophisticated, multi-layered geniuses, does include ... kissing! sex! And so on. And there's nothing wrong in expecting it - or even appreciating it - as a component, indeed a beautiful, multi-layered, complex etc component, in an account of love between men.

To be honest, I have the sad feeling this is going to add to some sort of "sadder but wiser" tale of supposedly elevated love that remains on a level of chaste non-expression.

Your comment made perfect sense. Japanese is not the second language of Taiwan. People do not go about in everday Taiwanese society randomly and indiscriminately speaking Japanese to others irrespective of their ability to understand.

Very interesting point. Well observed. And I like the parallel you see in the dramatic structure.

In our culture nowadays, throughout the world, we are constantly ... encouraged to accept anything & everything in the work environment, including deceit and exploitation - yet we are likewise encouraged to scrutinise the intimate/erotic dimensions of life in search of the fatal flaws of "toxicity" and "inappropriateness".

Thanks for this comprehensive explanation. You obviously love the series and you have certainly assembled all the evidence to help us share your view and arrive at the same conclusions! Very helpful. I'm still watching and I will make a point to be attentive to all the scenes, pointers and hints you highlight.

Not sure if I'll watch this, but being a man of old-fashioned and demanding intellectual standards only interested in the most edifying material, I'm definitely inspired by the notion of a "vacant and shirtless" Kiko Ipapo. Hmmm, yes.

Your choice of references is very apposite: Torquemadas, Spanish Inquisition, Christ on a bike, Thomas Aquinas. I found this one of the most Catholic series I've yet encountered coming out of the Philippines - a very Catholic country. I watch a lot of BL series from Asian countries - and it's very apparent to me that the Buddhist worldview of Thailand and Taiwan etc is different from the Catholic milieu of the Philippines. In a Buddhist setting, generally speaking, gender differences are perceived, yes, - but they're not highlighted in lurid colours; and sexuality, of whatever orientation, is just one part of a nebulous world of human desire. Traditional spirituality in particular is not seen as a hostile force opposed to the very existence of men who love men. In the Philippines (and South Korea too) at present, gender roles are endlessly harped upon by the Catholic Church: women are exhorted to adhere to an immaculate standard of purity, whereas men are expected to be earthy and culpable. Gay men, meanwhile, are ceaselessly denounced as the source of all evil. In BL drama reflecting this Catholic ambience, women are often sinned-against victims; and gay men come across as unstable and volatile - ultimately ... sinners. Maybe passionate and interesting and romantic - but wrong. Whereas the female characters are boring - but good.

Ultimately, Krisha, the female lead, comes across as a virtuous female victim - an innocent martyr. She does no wrong, she is only sinned against. The two men, presumably either bisexual or gay, are depicted as cruel, manipulative wrong-doers - passionate and out-of-control, sort of animalistic in their desires in comparison to the saintly Krisha.

I also find this reflected in the comments. Many people are totally incapable of tolerating "gullible, frail, human" gay male protatogonists, as you point out. If men who love men are to be accepted and allowed to enter into relationships, the message runs, they must adhere to a very high ethical standard of purity. Otherwise they are evildoers whom we must instantly condemn and reject as "toxic" and "inappropriate".

By the way, I LOVE "governess choir". Yep, love it. No doubt singing (or rather moaning): Toxic, toxic, toxic; inappropriate, inappropriate, inappropriate - save us from this toxic, inappropriate world!

In what way "misogynistic"? In what way did the series communicate and promote hatred of women? I'm curious.

I observed rather positive female characters with prominent roles in this series. How are they "misogynistic"?

In particular, Krisha, one of the 3 lead characters, comes across as caring, loving, open, interesting, stable, trusting etc - she is entirely virtuous. She does no wrong - she is only sinned against.

The two male leads, however, who may or may not be gay or bisexual, are portrayed as manipulative, unstable, cowardly. They are the male wrong-doers who sin against the innocent woman Krisha.

So, I took away a different set of impressions. Ultimately, the series seemed to be saying that heterosexual love is always superior - and women are beautiful and pure and kind and they generally tend to be suffering victims and martyrs. On the other hand, it likewise seemed to be saying that gay and bisexual men are volatile, manipulative, erratic, cruel - out of control "animal" types who cannot control their instincts.

Hmmmm. Go easy with that Parkinson's analogy, I suggest. I have Parkinsonism. A lot of people do. We don't make crazy, shaky, amateurishly poor-quality films & videos. We have ways of dealing with the reality of living with tremor. I would suggest instead "it looked like it was shot in the middle of the San Francisco earthquake" - but a 130-year-old survivor of the great 1906 quake might write in and say "Go easy with that San Francisco earthquake analogy"... I know - you can't win. It's probably better to take the risks and make your points expressively.

You have every right and very good reason to reject these suspect and disagreeable, genuinely toxic tropes, i.e. gay-guy-goes-straight and evil-ex-girlfriend. And what a pity you were then pursued and harassed with crazy accusations of discrimination and so on.

Sadly, the reality is that we don't live in a totally free, harmonious, openly diverse world in which all orientations are accepted and respected in a spirit of absolute equality and inclusion. No way. In reality, we live in a world in which the gay-guy-goes-straight device has been ruthlessly deployed over the past 50 or so years to convey messages such as: being gay is an inferior state that you can be redeemed from; being gay is a temporary phase to "progress beyond"; being gay is a delusion, a fad, an amusing but lightweight adventure; gay relationships are flimsy and second-rate and heterosexuality is the one and only form of "true love"; gay men are locked in a world of perversion and criminality from which only the pure love of a good woman can free them; and so on.

No one has done anything personal to you, no ... but you and I and countless others have been subjected to insulting homophobic messages, images and indeed "propaganda" over the years - frequently constructed around precisely this gay-guy-goes-straight theme. So we are very justified in rejecting it. And we don't just want - we NEED - to see people like ourselves on TV, as you put it. In my own case (thinking of the language of Crescent Moon's attack), a whole lot of very real personal homophobic damage has been done to me over the course of my life - and I not only want, but need to see lots (and lots and lots) of out-and-proud gay characters having fulfilling gay relationships and living full, interesting lives of, yes, 100% homosexual orientation. Yep. That's what I want and need. Bring it on!

Good point. More grabbing, please. Less fragile Victorian maiden trapped in male engineering-student body. Definitely a step in the right direction.

You are so right ... He hasn't even winked at an espresso. Maybe he's still doing market research. Slow, discreet, low-key market research.

A million thanks!!

Re: interesting female lead, Tae pulchritude, shallowness - ditto ditto ditto.

What a beautiful location! And judging by the map, extremely remote. Not sure I'll ever get there ...

Meanwhile - how extraordinary - you actually studied at one of the legendary Bangkok engineering departments? Well - tell us everything! Was it really packed with beautiful young men wearing those light three-quarter-length "engineering student jackets" we've got so used to? Do they really sport rings and pins and so on in the design of a gear? Are students called "Moons" really elected? And ... are those sexy young trainee engineers really all turning gay by the droves and falling madly in love with each other?

Your English is excellent, by the way. But you really should set up a blog - forget the questionable hill tribe marriage customs and focus on the truly scandalous goings-on we all need to know more about:
"Joey BKK tells ALL about those hot gay Thai engineering facuties"...

That's a very interesting, measured comment. I was a bit perplexed by the scene, I admit. But it's very representative of a sort of "broad" (= rather coarse, sexual) humour that can be found all over the world, especially in the context of marriage, engagement, etc. It's interesting, though, that this sort of stock comedic scene has in fact rather faded from view over the years - I have watched many Thai series but never encountered anything on this theme. Therefore I wasn't 100% sure what was going on. Thank goodness we have knowledgeable people like you who can clarify what's happening and what it signifies.

To what degree do you think that Thai production companies take an interest in the comments (e.g. on a website like this one) from "international viewers"? The behaviour of the production companies often puzzles me. But there are cases, as with 2gether, where you feel that viewers' dismay at the decline of the series in the later episodes was so explicit here and on Youtube that the production company rushed out a short sequel series to address the very points which had so displeased viewers.

I agree though that this is a gem of a drama. The only thing that worries me is that the writers seem to be drifting in the direction of turning the Tian/Phupha plotline into a straight love story - if Tian is allowed to remain Tian, a man, this will be avoided, but I'm made uneasy by the way he is being turned into a sort of reincarnated woman's spirit in a man's body. We've already heard that there are two spirits in Tian's body, and also that he looks a lot like Torfun, so the indications are worrying. I'd prefer to follow the love story of two male characters who are both definitely ... men. I hope my misgivings are wrong!

Yes, OK, poor dialogue, rather ... wooden acting, slipshod writing, endless food scenes, slow pacing, tourism videos masking as drama, and so on. We've said it all. But I admit I find something about this series ... captivating. More than one "something". The characters are more well-developed and engaging than I thought at first. They're distinctive. I know who they are and what they're like. There is no confusion of extra side-characters and secondary couples etc. There are scenes which are rather delightful. Nite/Peace is very absorbing to look at. Namwhan is a rather interesting female character who gets a lot of airtime - she's not an unknown malevolent "girlfriend" who gets parachuted into the plot in episode 7. There are characters who are ... GAY! - meaning not just otherwise-totally-straight guys who inexplicably fall for one unique male individual. Etc. In other words, it's growing on me.

Thanks. That addresses what I was concerned about. I'm keen to watch it now!

Thank you very much! Most helpful. Now I can watch without misgivings.

I'm curious. I haven't started watching as yet. Is the main story here presented as a (developing) relationship between two male characters - or as an essentially heterosexual love story about a woman's heart which goes on loving a specific man though the heart is now in a male body? If it's the latter, it sounds too close to comfort to "The Shipper" which was not really BL or gay at all, but about a heterosexual female soul trapped in a male body ... Help me out, fans! How does this story come across? Is Tian ... a man ... or a female identity in a male body?